Townhall – Hot Airhttp://hotair.com
The world’s first, full-service conservative Internet broadcast networkSat, 10 Dec 2016 04:22:59 +0000en-UShourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.6.116302432It sure looks like Donna Brazile tipped off the Clinton camp to a CNN town hall question (Update)http://hotair.com/archives/2016/10/11/donna-brazile-may-tipped-off-clinton-camp-question-hillary-get-townhall/
Tue, 11 Oct 2016 23:21:50 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=3926557Earlier today Jazz wrote about emails which indicate then DNC vice-chair Donna Brazile apparently tipped the Clinton campaign about some online activity the Bernie Sanders campaign was about to launch. Another email discovered in the Wikileaks dump of John Podesta emails shows Brazile sent the Clinton campaign a heads up on March 12 2016 with the subject line “From time to time I get the questions in advance.” Here’s what the email said:

Here’s one that worries me about HRC.

DEATH PENALTY

19 states and the District of Columbia have banned the death penalty. 31 states, including Ohio, still have the death penalty. According to the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, since 1973, 156 people have been on death row and later set free. Since 1976, 1,414 people have been executed in the U.S. That’s 11% of Americans who were sentenced to die, but later exonerated and freed. Should Ohio and the 30 other states join the current list and abolish the death penalty?

Brazile received an acknowledgement from Clinton campaign bigwig Jennifer Palmieri a few hours later.

What’s significant about this email is that the very next day, March 13, 2016, Hillary Clinton appeared at a town hall event in Ohio hosted by CNN’s Jake Tapper and TVOne’s Roland Martin. During that town hall Hillary Clinton was indeed asked about the death penalty using some of the exact same language used in the question Brazile had forwarded. You can see it yourself in the video below at 1:03:30 but here’s how the question was framed by Roland Martin during the town hall:

Secretary Clinton, since 1976, we have executed 1,414 people in this country. Since 1973, 156 who were convicted have been exonerated from the death row. This gentleman here is one of them. This is Ricky Jackson, wrongfully convicted of murder in 1975, he spent 39 years in prison. He is undecided. Ricky, what is your question?

Ricky Jackson then asked how Clinton could support the death penalty knowing “what we know right now.” Clinton gave a nearly 3 minute answer to that question.

CNN has denied it was possible for anyone to have the questions in advance, telling the Washington Post’s Erik Wemple, “We have never, ever given a town hall question to anyone beforehand.” Brazile, now the chairman of the DNC, also denied it in a lengthy statements given to the Post which reads in part, “As it pertains to the CNN Debates, I never had access to questions and would never have shared them with the candidates if I did.”

That’s all pretty much what you’d expect everyone to say when caught red-handed. But look again at the subject line, “From time to time I get the questions in advance.” What questions? Questions for what? And then look at how similar the question Brazile forwarded is to the one that was asked:

Forwarded:

“…since 1973, 156 people have been on death row and later set free. Since 1976, 1,414 people have been executed in the U.S.”

Asked:

“Secretary Clinton, since 1976, we have executed 1,414 people in this country. Since 1973, 156 who were convicted have been exonerated from the death row.”

Are we supposed to believe that Donna Brazile forwarded a question this similar to the one Clinton was asked a day later but that the two things were not connected somehow?

Finally, consider that the question forwarded to Clinton by Brazile was specifically about the death penalty in Ohio, which just happened to be where the town hall was talking place the next day.

Add all of that up and it’s really asking a lot to ask us to believe a flat denial that these two things are connected, especially when no one is offering an alternative explanation. Until Brazile and CNN come up with a more credible excuse (or claim the email was fabricated), I’m going to choose to believe my lying eyes.

Martin did not deny sharing information with Brazile. Instead, when asked by CNNMoney, he said “my questions were shared with my executive producer and several members of my TV One team.”

When asked in a followup question if he would explicitly rule out any sharing of questions with Brazile, Martin did not respond.

Brazile is still claiming she didn’t have access to the questions but with Martin refusing to rule out having shared this with her, her denial looks pretty thin at this point.

]]>3926557Gary Johnson: We need a path to citizenship and easily available work visas — and calling illegals “illegal” is “very incendiary”http://hotair.com/archives/2016/08/31/gary-johnson-need-path-citizenship-easily-available-work-visas-calling-illegals-illegal-incendiary/
Thu, 01 Sep 2016 02:01:51 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=3920522A golden moment from his interview with our Townhall cousin, Guy Benson. Watch him get genuinely pissy at around 4:00 when Guy, very politely, presses him on why the term “illegal” is so troubling. What we’re left with here is a third-party candidate who’s hyper-libertarian on immigration, of all issues, but not so libertarian on, for example, a carbon tax or whether business owners should be forced to cater gay weddings. That’s his pitch to conservatives who have been alienated by Trump: Possibly some new taxes, certainly less religious liberty, and all the amnesty you can eat. There’s no reason left why any anti-Trump conservative should waste a vote on this guy when they could back Evan McMullin, a write-in choice, or simply not vote for president on their ballot. Johnson’s appeal, we’re told, is as a protest candidate. What am I protesting in voting for him? Borders?

Take five minutes and read Robert Tracinski’s recent piece on Johnson as an essentially “left-wing candidate.” It’s less an indictment of Johnson, though, than it is of libertarian intellectuals who seem happy to watch him squander his opportunity this year with the right by remaining dogmatically left-ish on cultural issues:

My whole exchange with the folks at Reason, particularly the last response from Doherty, reveals a particular theme: libertarians can’t bring themselves to take any political position that might be seen as sympathizing with the Right in the culture war…

[T]he reaction of Johnson’s Libertarian apologists in an indication that, as much as they look down on the culture war and see themselves as floating above it, what that really means is that they have taken a position in the culture war, and they’re on the side of the Left. They would rather force you to bake the cake and make sure everyone knows that “the kind of anti-discrimination law we’ve had for many decades is not something he’s interested in rolling back,” in Doherty’s description.

I’m not sure this is an irrational calculation for libertarians to make, though. If Johnson shifted right on a few choice cultural issues to try to woo disaffected conservatives, two things would happen. First, he’d lose some of his support from progressives, and it’s unclear that he can make up those lost left-wing votes with an equal or greater number of right-wing votes. (Johnson pretty reliably draws a bit more from Hillary’s base in four-way polls right now than he does from Trump’s.) More importantly, it’s a core part of the libertarian “brand” that they don’t stoop to indulging supposedly primitive conservative impulses on culture-war issues. If they did, they’d be little better than — ugh — Paul Ryan. They might consider trading some of their more enlightened left-ish cultural positions for a real share of the electorate in November, but Johnson’s not going to bring them that. In a best-case scenario he’s a 15 percent candidate, which is a nice haul but not enough to win a single state or even to match Perot’s total in 1992. They’re not going to auction off one of the pillars of their political identity for something so meager. In which case, sure, why not seize the opportunity offered here by Guy to reach conservatives online by getting visibly angry at calling illegals “illegal”? It’s good for the brand. Not so good for votes, but the brand has always been more important than votes.

]]>3920522Video: Who’s really been tougher on Trump… CNN or Morning Joe?http://hotair.com/archives/2016/03/01/video-whos-really-been-tougher-on-trump-cnn-or-morning-joe/
Tue, 01 Mar 2016 18:21:05 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=3895580Now that Super Tuesday has finally arrived we’re going to get the answers to some questions. One of the big ones on the GOP side of things is whether Donald Trump’s momentum will hold up for a big, sweeping win or if the recent burst of attacks against him will blunt his path to the nomination. Either way, another lingering question will be just how effective the new and old media have been in fully investigating and reporting on The Donald’s positions, history and controversial statements. Part of that story will no doubt focus on cable news and if they’ve really been as tough on Trump as they might have been.

Over the past few weeks, that question has shown up in a media spat involving CNN and MSNBC, with particular attention being paid to the latter’s flagship offering, Morning Joe. I’ve been following this particular dust-up with quite a bit of amusement, being familiar with some of the hosts on each network. It started a few weeks ago when accusations began flying, accusing Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski of being too “cozy” with the Manhattan real estate mogul during his numerous appearances on and calls to their show, implying they weren’t pressing him as hard as their competitors on other networks like CNN. Chief among the accusers seemed to be CNN themselves.

In background discussions, NBC News and MSNBC journalists, reporters and staffers said there was widespread discomfort at the network over Scarborough’s friendship with Trump and his increasingly favorable coverage of the candidate.

“People don’t like that Joe is promoting Trump,” one MSNBC insider said. Others described Scarborough’s admiration for Trump as “over the top” and “unseemly.”

That was a couple of weeks ago, but the theme was repeated from the same network over and over. At one point they decided to release some hot mic comments picked up during a commercial break where the hosts had the nerve to speak politely to the guest. Pretty soon the theme was picked up in other places including the Washington Post. The gossipy nature of the story went so far as to generate claims that MSNBC honcho Phil Griffin was giving Scarborough the side eye.

So how “easy” has Morning Joe gone on Trump in reality? For a real world example we could look at two televised events from each network. CNN’s Anderson Cooper held a town hall event with The Donald the night after Scarborough and Brzezinski did the same on their network. Here’s a fun little video providing some examples of the grilling Trump received from each. It’s not long, so give it a look.

Anderson Cooper’s questions are certainly hard hitting, aren’t they? What kind of music do you like? The best fast food options at McDonald’s? Do you get enough sleep? However did poor Donald hold up under that sort of assault? I realize those are some comical excerpts, but read the full transcript of the CNN town hall. It never gets much tougher than that. (You can read the transcript of the MoJo town hall with Trump and compare for yourself.)

Since I actually watch Morning Joe, I’d found these charges rather dimwitted from the beginning. Keep in mind that Morning Joe was the show that actually told Trump to shut up and cut to commercial in the middle of one of his diatribes when he stuck to his talking points and refused to answer the questions being put to him. Further, Scarborough himself was the guy who took to the pages of the WaPo and penned an article describing Trump’s non-disavowal of David Duke as disqualifying for the presidency. He also said the same thing in the exact same words on his show the morning after Trump’s interview with Jake Tapper.

Oh, and in case you were wondering, Phil Griffin came out later and said that there was never any concern over Morning Joe’s relationship with or handling of Trump. It was all drama concocted to pass the time until the next primary rolled around. After the last round of accusations, even Chris Cillizza seemed to see the irony in it.

So what exactly got a bee in CNN’s bonnet to begin with? Well, I’m still not fully certified as a mind reader, but it might have something to do with the ratings. Fortunately, Nielsen keeps track of such things and the numbers for February tell a story which has been going on for a while now.

Particularly when you look at the total audience (P2+) numbers, CNN probably has some motivation to see MSNBC’s morning show take a few hits. Morning Joe averaged 43% more viewers in February than CNN’s New Day with Chris Cuomo and company. Fox and Friends may still be at the top of the roost, but as all the news networks have seen a bump in this election year, MSNBC’s was larger than the rest of them.

MSNBC’s pivot to more news reporting, especially campaign coverage, has lately resulted in improved ratings. So far this year, its weekday ratings among all viewers have grown 57 percent over the same period in 2015, compared with a 38 percent gain for CNN and 20 percent for Fox News, the cable-news leader, according to MSNBC. Among viewers aged 25 to 54, a key bloc for advertisers, MSNBC is up 76 percent, compared with 25 percent for CNN and 19 percent for Fox.

MoJo’s P2+ 613/24 share kept them ahead of CNN (and everyone else but Fox) for the 12th straight month, delivering their second best month ever. It also represented a nearly 90% increase over the same period last year. Now, I’m not saying that CNN is trying to knock down the competition here… naw. I’m sure it must be a coincidence.

]]>3895580Ted Cruz responds to Townhall Media/Change Politics forumhttp://hotair.com/archives/2016/02/25/ted-cruz-responds-to-townhall-mediachange-politics-forum/
Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:01:54 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=3894983Two weeks ago, Townhall Media and Change Politics partnered to create a conservative channel for a presidential forum that allows voters to ask questions of the Republican candidates in the field. Two of the candidates took up the challenge; we heard from Senator Marco Rubio earlier, and now Senator Ted Cruz offers his perspective on the same questions. Cruz submitted his in writing, but it’s not difficult to hear his voice clearly in these answers.

Bob Owens: Why do you think the Founding Fathers considered the Second Amendment the next most important right after the freedom of speech?

The Second Amendment, as Justice Story so rightly noted, is the palladium of all liberties. The Second Amendment rights aren’t just for protecting hunting rights, or safeguarding your right to target practice. It is a constitutional right to protect our children, families, homes, lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny.

Matthew Vespa: How would you reverse President Obama’s ambitious environmental regulatory agenda and protect fixed-income seniors from rising energy costs?

The Obama administration has been utterly lawless, seeking to impose their radical leftist ideology on the American people regardless of the cost or legality. I will roll back all of President Obama’s overreaching regulations and end the war on affordable energy — including the Clean Power Plan. I have introduced the American Energy Renaissance Act to provide a clear, comprehensive template that will empower the private sector to create good-paying American jobs, spur economic growth, expand opportunity, and make energy more affordable.

Cortney O’Brien: How high of a priority will it be for you to defund Planned Parenthood during your first term in office?

In the Senate, I have led the fight to defund Planned Parenthood, and I will continue to stand for life. We must stop treating the sanctity of human life as a business transaction. If I’m elected President, on the first day in office, I will instruct the US Department of Justice to open an investigation into Planned Parenthood and to prosecute any and all criminal violations. I will continue to defend the right to life of every person, born and unborn, and I will welcome the opportunity to defund this life-ending organization from the Oval Office.

Moe Lane: If elected, who specifically (please give a name) would you nominate to the Supreme Court?

This issue is incredibly important, and the sad reality is this, Democrats, when they make Supreme Court appointments they bat almost 1000. Their appointments are liberal activists and they vote left-wing on every major case. Republicans, we bat about 500: about half the Republican nominees turn out to be total disasters. Earl Warren, Bill Brennan, John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Harry Blackmun the author of Roe vs. Wade. Every one of those was a Republican appointee. But when it comes time to nominate someone, they don’t want to spend the political capital to actually confirm a proven constitutionalist. The other Republicans in the field do not have the record to give us any reason to believe they would be any different.

The next president could get one, two, three, four Supreme Court Justices. I have spent my entire adult life fighting judicial activism, fighting to defend the Constitution. I give my word that every justice I put on the court will be a principled conservative jurist, a constitutionalist who follows the law and does not legislate from the bench, and I will be willing to spend the political capital to ensure the justices get confirmed because their task is protecting the constitutional liberties that are the very foundation of our nation.

Joseph Cunningham: As a parent and a teacher, I’d like to know: what are your plans on bringing about change in education in America, such as school choice?

School choice is the civil rights issue of the 21st century. I am a passionate advocate of school choice. Education is too important for it to be governed by bureaucrats in Washington taking choices away from parents and kids. We should be empowering parents to choose the best education for their kids. And we need to end programs like Common Core.

Educational opportunity thrives on choice, ingenuity and diversity: The Department of Education squelches all three. I will work to eliminate the Department of Education and restore the states’ constitutional power, and liberates students and teachers from a failed top-down approach.

Editor’s pick: Kelly Brady | Berkley, MI: What does it mean to be a conservative in 2016, and ideally, how should that change – if at all?

Right now, we’re bankrupting our kids and our grandkids. Our constitutional rights are under assault each and every day, and America has receded from leadership in the world. It’s time to get back to the vision of the framers and protect the unalienable rights given to each of us by our Creator.

I have been a champion of Opportunity Conservatism for decades. We must preserve the principles that have made this nation the greatest beacon of liberty and apply them in innovative ways to once again unleash unprecedented freedom, prosperity, and opportunity.

The policies of Barack Obama stifle jobs and wages, and the people who are hurting the most are young people, minorities, single moms, are those who are finding it nearly impossible to achieve the American Dream. Every conservative should focus every policy on easing the means of ascent up the economic ladder. Our free market system has served as the most incredible engine of growth for millions of people from all over the world who come with nothing and achieve anything. We need to champion jobs, growth, and opportunity.

If the American people continue to rise up and speak the truth, we will get back to the free market and constitutional principles that have made America the last best hope of mankind.

]]>3894983Videos: Marco Rubio responds to Townhall Media/Change Politics forumhttp://hotair.com/archives/2016/02/25/videos-marco-rubio-responds-to-townhall-mediachange-politics-forum/
Thu, 25 Feb 2016 17:05:42 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=3894985Two weeks ago, Townhall Media and Change Politics partnered to create a conservative channel for a presidential forum that allows voters to ask questions of the Republican candidates in the field. Two of the candidates took up the challenge — Senators Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz. (Jeb Bush also agreed to the challenge, but suspended his campaign before the conclusion of this forum.) Senator Rubio responded to the questions in video form. Senator Cruz’s responses, submitted in written form, will be published two hours from now.

Bob Owens: Why do you think the Founding Fathers considered the Second Amendment the next most important right after the freedom of speech?

Matthew Vespa: How would you reverse President Obama’s ambitious environmental regulatory agenda and protect fixed-income seniors from rising energy costs?

Cortney O’Brien: How high of a priority will it be for you to defund Planned Parenthood during your first term in office?

Moe Lane: If elected, who specifically (please give a name) would you nominate to the Supreme Court?

Joseph Cunningham: As a parent and a teacher, I’d like to know: what are your plans on bringing about change in education in America, such as school choice?

Editor’s pick: Kelly Brady | Berkley, MI: What does it mean to be a conservative in 2016, and ideally, how should that change – if at all?

]]>3894360Conservatives speak: Add your questions to the mixhttp://hotair.com/archives/2016/02/11/conservatives-speak-add-your-questions-to-the-mix/
http://hotair.com/archives/2016/02/11/conservatives-speak-add-your-questions-to-the-mix/#commentsThu, 11 Feb 2016 19:01:47 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=3893318Ever wanted to ask presidential candidates a question? Tired of media filters on the issues? Here’s your chance to cut through the gatekeeping and get direct access to presidential contenders in both parties. Townhall Media has partnered with Change Politics to provide a forum for voters to pose questions, and candidates have committed to answering the most popular of them as chosen by the users themselves. Townhall will run the conservative channel:

Voters have a new resource this election cycle to help them cut through the noise of the primary and general process. Influential petition platform Change.org launched their new mobile web app and desktop site, Change Politics, Thursday morning, increasing access to candidates in the presidential field.

Through Change Politics, users can submit questions directly to participating candidates, search through the endorsements from prominent figures and organizations in the political arena, and create a personalized ballot guide based on their preferences. …

In addition to teaming up with several of the campaigns, Change Politics is partnering with media outlet across the country during their initial launch. Local outlets include the Des Moines Register, the Concord Monitor, and the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Townhall.com, in coordination with the rest of the Townhall Media sites, will participate as the conservative media partner for the rollout of a national town hall that will take place in February.

The website already has voter-submitted questions, and we have eight days to get many, many more! As the website grows, more features will come, and not just for the presidential election:

Endorsements​- voters and organizations will be able to make endorsements for candidates, and see endorsements being made by other people and organizations in their network.

Personalized Ballot​- with the new information from endorsements and questions, voters can populate a sample ballot for election day, empowering all of us to make informed decisions about everyone from the Presidential Candidates to City Dog Catcher.

Change Politics also sees this as an opportunity for journalists normally locked out of media access to candidates to engage candidates directly:

Change Politics helps journalists track voters’ views and concerns, and support for candidates, by issue and geography.

Outlets can set up dedicated branded “Forums” on Change Politics to crowdsource questions from voters in advance of an outlet-organized interview or event.

Right now, we have confirmed that Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush will participate in the forum. We have invited other Republican campaigns to join us as well. Be sure to add your voice — and your questions — to the mix!

Note: I have already added my question, complete with video. Check out the site to find it — it’s on the budget — and upvote it if you like it.

Update: John Kasich has not confirmed his participation yet in the national effort. I have edited that paragraph and regret the error. Also, I forgot to include the link to my question, which I have added now.

]]>http://hotair.com/archives/2016/02/11/conservatives-speak-add-your-questions-to-the-mix/feed/703893318Trump’s campaign manager: If Fox won’t remove Megyn Kelly as moderator, maybe we’ll hold our own townhall on Thursday nighthttp://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/25/trumps-campaign-manager-if-fox-wont-remove-megyn-kelly-as-moderator-maybe-well-hold-our-own-townhall-on-thursday-night/
http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/25/trumps-campaign-manager-if-fox-wont-remove-megyn-kelly-as-moderator-maybe-well-hold-our-own-townhall-on-thursday-night/#commentsMon, 25 Jan 2016 16:21:17 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=3891317Lewandowski’s bluffing, just as Trump bluffed before the September debate in implying that he might not participate unless CNN devoted the proceeds to veterans groups. Stirring a little extra controversy is all part of Trump’s regular debate pre-game. And there’s not a ghost of a chance that Roger Ailes will meet his demand: Not only would he look weak in caving, he would humiliate the network’s new biggest star in doing so. If Fox wants to keep Kelly away from network news, agreeing with Trump that she’s tainted by bias and needs to be kicked off the panel would be the worst thing they could do. Besides, half the reason to watch this freak show is because it’s the first time she and Trump will be face to face since the unpleasantness of the August debate. Who knows what holes he’ll accuse her of bleeding out of this time?

But never mind all that. Question: Would skipping the debate and hosting an event of his own that night be a smart move for Trump? I can see the argument that it would.

Trump’s campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, indicated that Trump could walk away from the debate if Fox won’t exclude Kelly. “Let’s see what happens,” he told me. “It’s fair to say Mr. Trump is a significant ratings driver for these debates. If we aren’t on stage for some reason, they wouldn’t have the record 24 million viewers and would be back with 1-2 million people.”…

In a statement to reporters, Fox News spokesperson Irena Briganti said: “Megyn Kelly has no conflict of interest. Donald Trump is just trying to build up the audience for Thursday’s debate, for which we thank him.”…

Lewandowski, Trump’s campaign manager, told me Trump could stage his own televised town hall on Thursday night and let Fox’s rivals air it. “That would be a great idea,” he said.

It is a great idea. Imagine if Team Trump threw together some sort of mega-rally on Thursday night and handed exclusive broadcast rights to CNN. Maybe that’s logistically impossible: They’d have to do it ASAP to give CNN time to promote it, and it’d have to be a capital-E Event to draw viewers away from the debate. A normal Trump speech might not hack it. But that’s what Trump’s good at — he’s a showman, so here’s his chance to put on a show. He could say that he’s boycotting the debate because he doesn’t trust Fox’s “establishment” media filter, which would create a bit of awkwardness for Cruz, and wants to take his message to the people. And whatever the event ends up being, it’d have to be held in Iowa, of course. Otherwise skipping the debate might offend Iowans as a signal that he felt he no longer needed to compete for their votes. The spectacle of Trump alone on one channel before a raucous audience versus the other stiffs on Fox debating the finer points of immigration policy would signal to voters just how “different” his candidacy is. And imagine the humiliation to Fox if Trump’s thing on CNN did ratings comparable to the debate, or at least put a major dent in Fox’s share.

But then, if Trump was inclined to go this route, presumably he’d have already taken steps to plan something. At a minimum, he would have held the Palin endorsement in reserve for this week’s Thursday night “event.” Not even Trump is likely to draw the media away from the drama of a debate — but a “special event” featuring a “major announcement” with special guest Sarah Palin would have. Which is why, as I say, this is all a bluff and Trump will be there onstage on Thursday. Besides, why would he punish Fox News for his beef with Megyn Kelly specifically? With the exception of Kelly and a few others, there’s no cable news outlet that’s deeper in the tank for Trump than Fox is:

The reactions of several Fox personalities seemed to mirror the sentiment FNC host Jeanine Pirro expressed on Twitter that morning: “The National Review needs to get in line with the rest of the Republicans. How dare they trash the front-runner Donald Trump!”…

“These words should disturb every American,” said co-host Harris Faulkner. “He [Trump] is not deserving of conservative support in the caucuses and primaries. Whose job is it to decide who gets to be where? It’s the voters who decide. It is not any particular party. That’s offensive on its face.”

Co-host Andrea Tantaros faulted National Review for a lack of credibility, saying that instead of criticizing Trump, they should write about why Trump is resonating with so many in the Republican base, and direct their magazine’s fire at the GOP establishment…

Later on The Five, Eric Bolling expressed worry that the essays would provide more fuel for Democrats to use against Trump if he made it to the general election — a concern suspiciously hard to find during Trump’s trashing of his fellow Republican candidates throughout the primary.

“Everyone’s now saying, Oh he doesn’t check this box, he doesn’t check this box,” complained [Jesse] Watters. “Do you know what box is important to check? Filling up 40,000-people stadiums on a Tuesday night. That’s the box that counts on Election Day. I don’t think principles matter if you can’t get elected and institute those principles. And I think a lot people now are putting pure conservatism over the country.”

Don’t forget the defenses of Trump from star hosts like Greta Van Susteren and Sean Hannity and the fact that “Fox & Friends” has given him a regular form to promote his views for years. (And that’s just the cable-news wing of conservative media. Conservative talk radio’s months-long promotion of Trump is another matter.) After all that, it says a lot about the thinness of Trump’s skin that he’d even tease the idea of skipping a Fox debate because there’s one host there who won’t gladhand him.

Something to think about: Why should Trump’s polling be considered so impressive given the phenomenal advantage he’s had over the rest of the field in his access to media, not just on Fox but among outlets across the spectrum? Jeb Bush’s critics have been goofing on him for nearly a year because he hasn’t been able to translate the staggering amount of money his Super PAC started with into any poll momentum. His dad’s rich friends gave him $100 million to buy the nomination and he’s still in single digits. Trump, however, has been given the equivalent of untold millions in free advertising over the past six months from media outlets willing, for the sake of ratings, to grant him as much airtime as he likes, and his polling isn’t wildly different today from where it was when he first surged into the lead last summer. On any given morning, Trump could call in to CNN and get 10-20 minutes to talk about whatever he wants; someone like Cruz or Rubio is lucky to get one four-minute carefully structured interview segment by comparison. Trump was at 25.8 percent in Iowa on September 2 in RCP’s poll average and, until just this past week when he started to inch up, he was still at 26-27 percent there in mid-January. If Jeb deserves heat for not using his fundraising windfall to build up his numbers, why doesn’t Trump deserve heat for not using his media windfall to do the same? Where would Ted Cruz be today if the media gave him as much airtime as it gives Trump?

]]>http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/25/trumps-campaign-manager-if-fox-wont-remove-megyn-kelly-as-moderator-maybe-well-hold-our-own-townhall-on-thursday-night/feed/4353891317Meet our new cousin: Twitchyhttp://hotair.com/archives/2013/12/10/meet-our-new-cousin-twitchy/
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/12/10/meet-our-new-cousin-twitchy/#commentsTue, 10 Dec 2013 20:31:33 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=289986I’m pretty sure you’ve met, but now that they’re part of the Townhall family, a formal re-introduction is in order.

It took four years of hard work by the boss emeritus to make Ed and me salable. It took her and her staff less than half that time to make Twitchy a hot property. Harrumph.

Launched in March 2012, Twitchy was the brainchild of conservative author and pundit Michelle Malkin, who until now served as owner and chief executive officer. The site is unique in the conservative media landscape for its native social aim, acting as a “Twitter curator” and timelining social media wars between pundits, politicians and celebrities…

Garthwaite says Malkin will relinquish the title of CEO, but will still be active in promoting the Twitchy brand. He said the nine Twitchy staff writers, disparately located around the country, will not be asked to relocate to the Townhall news offices in Arlington, Va. Garthwaite would not disclose terms of the deal.

With the acquisition, Salem Communications will now operate a consolidated block of three major properties in the conservative media landscape in diversified areas. Garthwaite predicts that folding in Twitchy will boost the cumulative traffic of the overall property up to 11 million uniques a month. The company’s properties have also had success on television in the last couple years with Townhall’s political editor Guy Benson and news editor Katie Pavlich becoming Fox News contributors.

I hear that Mary Katharine Whatsername is pretty successful too. Seriously, though, congratulations to MM and her team on the sale. I’m looking forward to working with all of them. And now, if you’ll excuse me, I need to send her an e-mail begging her to let me invest early in whatever site she has planned next.

In the spirit of self-promotion, here’s Whatsername last night in her regular spot on the most highly-rated cable news show in America trying to convince O’Reilly that a major paper in a state that just legalized marijuana might want to have someone working that beat.

]]>http://hotair.com/archives/2013/12/10/meet-our-new-cousin-twitchy/feed/182289986Video: McCain town hall on immigration in Arizona gets hothttp://hotair.com/archives/2013/02/20/video-mccain-town-hall-on-immigration-in-arizona-gets-hot/
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/02/20/video-mccain-town-hall-on-immigration-in-arizona-gets-hot/#commentsWed, 20 Feb 2013 15:41:02 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=245532I’m giving you the video, but honestly all you need to do is look at this photo. That’s the face of a man who once famously grumbled about having to build “the goddamned fence,” then magically metamorphosed into an immigration hawk in time for his 2010 Senate re-election bid, and now has magically metamorphosed back into Chuck Schumer’s dance partner on a path to citizenship — only to face questions at home about that “goddamned fence” again.

If you missed it last week, here’s what one Arizona cop told Katie Pavlich about the future of comprehensive reform:

During his State of the Union address last night, President Obama touted the lowest illegal border crossings in 40 years, but with amnesty looming and border enforcement most likely coming after citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants, law enforcement officials in Arizona are seeing an uptick in activity.

“We are seeing an uptick in bodies as of the last couple of weeks. We are starting to see large groups again in our AOR [Area of Responsibility]. The groups are up into the 20 to 40 range,” Pinal County Sheriff Department Lieutenant and SWAT team member Matthew Thomas tells Townhall…

Thomas tells Townhall Pinal County deputies are bracing for a “mad dash” as hints of amnesty continue.

WaPo also reported last week on the “new urgency” among would-be illegals to make it into the U.S. in time to enjoy the instant legalization that’ll come if/when the McCain/Schumer/Rubio Senate bill is enacted. (“[I]f the Americans were finally going to change their laws and offer a chance to stay, no one wanted to be stuck on the wrong side of the border.”) Still, give Maverick credit for facing the music here. You won’t see many other Republicans in Congress follow his lead, not just because they lack the nerve but because having grassroots conservatives on camera shouting about troops on the border or whatever from the audience undermines the whole point of this effort from the GOP leadership’s perspective. McCain himself has been admirably blunt about their motives: “Elections. Elections.” This is a PR play to try to win back some Latino voters, and the last thing you want when you’re doing PR is someone on your side going wildly “off-message.” Don’t expect many more town halls unless the audience has been carefully screened in advance.

Here’s the local newscast about the event followed by a 2010 flashback to one of the most ludicrous campaign ads you’ll ever see.

]]>http://hotair.com/archives/2013/02/20/video-mccain-town-hall-on-immigration-in-arizona-gets-hot/feed/95245532Piers Morgan to Ben Shapiro: How about participating in a townhall debate where my other guests and I can berate you?http://hotair.com/archives/2013/01/15/piers-morgan-to-ben-shapiro-how-about-participating-in-a-townhall-debate-where-my-other-guests-and-i-can-berate-you/
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/01/15/piers-morgan-to-ben-shapiro-how-about-participating-in-a-townhall-debate-where-my-other-guests-and-i-can-berate-you/#commentsTue, 15 Jan 2013 20:51:25 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=239083They need a gun-rights supporter for their ritual shaming ceremony and since Shapiro embarrassed Morgan the other night, he was naturally a top choice. Alternate headline: “Man declines to serve as prop.”

[W]hen it came time to book the show, Morgan’s team refused to tell Shapiro what the format of the show would be. When Shapiro said that he expected balance — a second one-on-one interview with Morgan — Morgan’s producers balked. They did insist strongly, however, that Shapiro appear on the show, where he would be “in for the entire show” and “have a huge part.” When Shapiro again reiterated that balance would be a one-on-one, and asked for more details on what his role would be, Morgan’s producers went silent…

It seems relatively clear what Morgan’s plan was. If Shapiro was to be the centerpiece of the show but not to have any one-on-one facetime with Morgan, this was to be Morgan’s revenge for his clobbering in the last faceoff with Shapiro. During that debate, Shapiro accused Morgan of “standing on the graves of the children of Sandy Hook.” Morgan had no coherent response. This time, it seems, Morgan wasn’t just going to stand on the graves of the children of Sandy Hook – he was going to stack the audience with grieving parents and relatives of the victims of Newtown, then confront Shapiro with them.

The White House is also planning to stack the audience tomorrow with kids for Obama’s big gun-control announcement to remind America that he cares about children and gun-rights supporters don’t. While they’re there, President Caresalot should let them know how much more each of them will owe four years from now after Democrats get done blocking every last proposal for significant spending cuts. He used to pretend to worry about things like that as part of his “for the children” pre-presidential platform. Not anymore.

But I digress. Shapiro’s having fun turning the shame tables on Morgan on Twitter:

The debate will include gun crime victims, yes @benshapiro – do you have a problem looking them in the eye? Like I said, grow a pair.

Evidently Morgan’s producers have now agreed to two solo segments, so expect another round of faux-indignant “how dare you” stammering from the host tomorrow night. One thing that’s interesting to me about Morgan’s relentless guns grandstanding lately is that I haven’t seen much enthusiasm for it, even from people whom you might expect to cheer him on. Case in point: Watch the Colbert segment below. There’s an odd hint of antagonism to it even though you know Colbert agrees with him on the merits. Maybe that’s a function of suspicion over the old phone-hacking claims against him or maybe it’s as simple as gun-control fans thinking that Morgan’s lame interviews and insufferable posturing do the cause more harm than good. His ratings are strong lately but there seems to be no significant support base for him among lefty media. Or am I just missing it?

]]>http://hotair.com/archives/2013/01/15/piers-morgan-to-ben-shapiro-how-about-participating-in-a-townhall-debate-where-my-other-guests-and-i-can-berate-you/feed/162239083Open thread: The second debatehttp://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/16/open-thread-the-second-debate/
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/16/open-thread-the-second-debate/#commentsWed, 17 Oct 2012 00:38:18 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=2242599 p.m. ET across the dial, don’t miss your chance to watch a man who “really doesn’t like people” try to relate to average voters. According to Team Mitt, all they need tonight is a tie:

“He does not need to take home the same performance” as in the first debate in Denver on Oct. 3, in which Romney was widely considered the dominant debater, the aide, who is involved in the debate preparation, told National Journal on Tuesday. He said that the Romney team is preparing for a fierce attack from Obama on all fronts even though a town-hall format generally requires candidates to address questioners from the audience more than they do each other.

“They can’t afford another debate where they don’t lash out,” said the aide, who would speak only on condition of anonymity about internal debate preparations. “So we’re ready for it: the ‘47 percent’ comment, Bain Capital, the Cayman Islands” tax shelters, all of which have been staples of the Obama ad campaign in recent months…

The Romney team doesn’t expect foreign policy to dominate this debate, but they also hope to raise fresh questions over the Sept. 11 death of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans in Libya by focusing on what they consider a misstatement by Vice President Joe Biden in his Oct. 11 debate with Rep. Paul Ryan, the aide said.

Benghazi is one obvious line of attack. Another, I hope, is Mitt trying to pin Obama down on what exactly he intends to do with a second term. For all of the Democrats’ cutesy-poo gimmicks about Romney’s evasiveness, the incumbent’s vision for America over the next four years is conspicuously thin, much to the dismay of Democratic pollsters. As for O, he’s got two basic themes, each of them potentially problematic. One: He’ll dismiss Romney’s messaging at the first debate as evidence that he’s a flip-flopper, although that’ll undercut Team Obama’s months-long messaging about what a committed neo-Goldwater ideological fanatic Mitt supposedly is. Two: He’ll go after Romney on Bain and the “47 percent,” although if he’s too nasty about it he’ll risk leaving the sort of jackhole impression that Biden left after the VP debate. Biden could get away with that because he’s Biden, because he was playing to his base, and because ultimately no one really cares what happens at the VP debate. Obama, who’s been banking on a vanishing “likeability gap” with Romney to put him over the top, really can’t. There’s very little left of Hopenchange circa 2008 as it is; if he loses his above-the-fray Bambi image too, then there’s basically nothing.

Having said that, I think there’s virtually nothing O could do onstage tonight short of barfing on someone that’ll get the left to admit afterward that he did poorly. They desperately need him to have a good performance to remain viable, and thus the narrative will make it so tomorrow even if Obama doesn’t make it so tonight. His problem is that, even with that media cushion, it’s unlikely that Romney will falter, which is really what O needs to reverse the momentum here. The only thing I can think of that might potentially get hairy for Romney is if he’s put on the spot by a questioner who’s either extremely confrontational or somehow deeply sympathetic — a “YouTube moment,” in other words. Romney can handle himself against O, but the crux of the Dems’ message against him has always been that he’s some sort of enemy of the working man. If they get a moment like that tonight, of some audience member being accusatory with Romney, that could get traction. All depends upon how he handles it, of course.

Here’s the Hot Air/Townhall Twitter widget for live-tweeting. While we wait, revisit four of Obama’s emptiest campaign promises from the last townhall debate he did in 2008, as there are bound to be a few more tonight. And bear in mind that no matter how well he does, his campaign’s still facing one last jobs report before election day — and all signs point to something not so hope-y change-y. Exit quotation from Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg: “The danger for Obama is that Romney would become the candidate of change.”

]]>http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/16/open-thread-the-second-debate/feed/5098224259RNC memories and thankshttp://hotair.com/archives/2012/09/01/rnc-memories-and-thanks/
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/09/01/rnc-memories-and-thanks/#commentsSat, 01 Sep 2012 15:31:18 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=216058I’m still not even close to being fully recovered from the last five days in Tampa. (As my fabulous misspelling of “towel” in the title of my first post this morning will attest.) But before we slide back fully into the normal coverage routine here at Hot Air, I wanted to take a moment to recognize some of the people and organizations who rolled out the welcome mat for us and made it such a memorable convention.

First, I’d like to thank the folks at the RNC. And even more importantly – as I’m sure they themselves would agree – the army of volunteers who turned out every day in the blazing sun, driving rain and oppressive humidity to do the myriad thankless tasks required to keep the wheels turning on an event of this magnitude.

Next, I’d like to thank the Romney / Ryan team, and in particular the folks they assigned to do outreach to the “special press” (read: bloggers and social media folks) during the convention. They made sure that people outside of the traditional, mainstream media had a way to get in. And once inside, they worked with us to ensure that we not only had internet access, but lined up interviews and visits from high level surrogates, members of Congress and more. There had been some grumbling early in the year about the campaign’s availability but they really got on board with us.

Of course I have to thank our team from Townhall and Hot Air for an amazing experience, particularly our General Manager, Jonathan Garthwaite. In addition to having to wrangle up last minute plane tickets and hotel rooms, he spent his time ferrying people around for interviews and story research, locating cameras, memory cards and sundry items needed to keep the team moving. (We won’t mention his advice for his secret method of getting a good night’s sleep on the road.) Also, working with MaryKatharine Ham, Erika Johnsen, Guy Benson, Elisabeth Meinecke, Kevin Glass and Linlee DuBard was an experience not to be missed. (You should be following all of them on Twitter.)

Thanks also go out to the many groups who sponsored and put on a slew of great events while we were all in Tampa and welcomed us to them. These include the American Conservative Union, GOProud, American Taxpayer Union, American Petroleum Institute and too many others to name. These gatherings really rounded out the event, provided tons of great information and got people motivated and involved in important issues for this campaign.

And last, but far from least, (most, actually) I know that the entire team wants to join me in thanking the people who are really responsible for this… you. The loyal readers of Hot Air and Townhall.com are the only reason we’re here and able to continue doing what we do. The way you all participated in the convention with us and drove traffic to the site was the real reward. We went well over a million hits just during the day shift more than once this week and the comments sections and reader responses at both sites were off the charts. I hope you enjoyed the chance to share the convention experience with us and the behind the scenes look at the biggest shindig every four years.

And with that, we return you to our regularly scheduled blathering.

]]>http://hotair.com/archives/2012/09/01/rnc-memories-and-thanks/feed/22216058Finally: Blogger works for site everyone always thought she worked for anywayhttp://hotair.com/archives/2012/07/11/finally-blogger-works-for-site-everyone-always-thought-she-worked-for-anyway/
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/07/11/finally-blogger-works-for-site-everyone-always-thought-she-worked-for-anyway/#commentsWed, 11 Jul 2012 04:05:41 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=205921Just a quick note to say hey and thank you for your generous welcome, everyone! I’ve been a fan of HotAir since its launch, and a fan of Ed’s and AP’s since almost the beginning of their blogging careers. It’s truly a privilege to work with them and the rest of the crew here.

As Allah noted, I’ve worked for a few conservative organizations during my career— The Heritage Foundation, Townhall, the Weekly Standard, the Daily Caller, and a morning radio show on Washington’s conservative talk station. It was near the beginning of that career that Michelle Malkin, the Boss Emeritus as she’s known around here, was kind enough to let me fill in for her in the early days of HotAir, recording a couple episodes of her daily video blog, Vent. It was my first attempt at online video, and I’m sure it was pretty goofy, and not entirely intentionally. You HotAir veterans know what I’m talkin’ about.

Ever since then, HotAir’s always made me feel like an honorary part of the team, and many in the HotAir audience apparently agreed. For years, I’ve been running into people who assume I work for HotAir, so I’m glad we could make it official.

Around here, I’m just hoping to add to the talent on hand and keep y’all entertained. I’ll be blogging, appearing on The Ed Morrissey Show, doing some video, and possibly a little podcasting.

Thanks to the team here for being so inviting and to the team that got me here for being so good to me. Without Michelle and my other bosses (Jon Garthwaite, Hugh, Tucker and Bill Kristol, lookin’ at you!)— most of whom I’m lucky to still work with— taking a chance on me and my occasionally Peep-themed work, I wouldn’t get to have so much fun doing what I love for you guys.

As for what I’ll be able to accomplish here, I think we can safely say that we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the time – when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves, and our highest ideals.

I just ask that you never hold me accountable for any of that. Cool? Cool.

]]>http://hotair.com/archives/2012/07/11/finally-blogger-works-for-site-everyone-always-thought-she-worked-for-anyway/feed/280205921Welcome Hot Air’s new editor-at-large, Mary Katharine Hamhttp://hotair.com/archives/2012/07/10/welcome-hot-airs-new-editor-at-large-mary-katharine-ham/
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/07/10/welcome-hot-airs-new-editor-at-large-mary-katharine-ham/#commentsTue, 10 Jul 2012 21:57:41 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=205853This post is supposed to introduce her, but our longtime readers need no introduction. MKH’s work has been featured on Hot Air since the earliest days of the site. I doubt there’s a single HamNation vid from 2006-07 that didn’t end up on our front page. Ed and I have hoped for ages that she’d join HA, so natural a fit is she, but the competition for her writing is fierce: She’s worked for the Heritage Foundation, Townhall, the Weekly Standard, the Daily Caller, and even co-hosted a morning radio show in D.C., in addition of course to her weekly appearances on O’Reilly. And now, I’m thrilled to say, she works for us. Starting today, she’s our new editor-at-large. She’ll blog here, contribute to Townhall magazine, and debut her new video projects on the site. She’s simply a perfect addition as the campaign starts to heat up. Please give her a warm welcome in the comments.

MK is guest-hosting for Hugh Hewitt this week along with Townhall’s Guy Benson. She’ll be talking about this imminently, at 6 p.m. ET, on air with Guy and our own Ed Morrissey, so tune in right now.

]]>http://hotair.com/archives/2012/07/10/welcome-hot-airs-new-editor-at-large-mary-katharine-ham/feed/471205853Video: Christie still not suffering fools gladlyhttp://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/09/video-christie-still-not-suffering-fools-gladly/
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/09/video-christie-still-not-suffering-fools-gladly/#commentsFri, 09 Mar 2012 20:40:59 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=184040New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has a reputation which precedes him. Never afraid to go out and communicate directly with his constituents, he seems to love to take questions from both supporters and detractors alike. And if someone chooses to engage him in a bit more vigorous fashion… let’s just say he’s not the shy, wallflower type by nature.

This was on display once again when he was challenged on the subject of merging Rutgers University with Rowan University in Glassboro, New Jersey.

The most-heated town hall clash of the year started today with a shouting match, drove Gov. Chris Christie to call a vocal opponent to the proposed Rutgers Camden-Rowan merger an “idiot,” and ended with a stern talking-to by police.

Just four questions in, Christie called on William Brown, a 34-year-old law school student and veteran from Mt. Laurel, who explained, calmly at first: “I know that all my friends in the military no matter what state they’re from respect that fact that I go to Rutgers. It’s also true that none of my friends in the military no matter what state they’re from have ever heard of Rowan.”…

“Listen we’re not going to get into a debate here, ok?” Christie said. “I listened to you. You’re unhappy about it. You don’t want Rutgers to merge with Rowan under any circumstances. Well here’s what going to happen. Rutgers is going to merge with Rowan and here’s why –”

“It’s not a merger,” Brown continued, still interrupting.

“I sat here and listened to your story and your position — excuse me — without interrupting you,” Christie said, while Brown kept it up with: “It’s not a story, it’s the truth.”

The video follows, but there are a couple of points about the protester which are worth noting. First, Christie doesn’t need to get too far down in the weeds with Brown because he’s a veteran and, by his account, a Navy SEAL. (I have no reason to doubt him on this. Simply haven’t seen any stories documenting it.)

The second issue is that Brown is not simply a random citizen unhappy with one particular policy. His is also a Democrat with political aspirations of his own, having already taken one run at a seat in the Assembly. But watch the video and judge for yourself as to how well it was handled.